Why did Trump underperform in Iowa?

posted at 11:21 am on February 2, 2016 by Allahpundit

Conventional wisdom is congealing around two key factors in Trump’s loss this morning, so let me offer them to you as I think there’s merit to both. The main factor: Evangelicals came through for Cruz in the crunch. Political sites have been filled with news over the past few weeks about Trump’s surprising strength with born-again Christians, particularly given how intensely Cruz was courting those same voters. A guy who doesn’t know if he’s ever asked God’s forgiveness and who’s regularly demonstrated his unfamiliarity with Christian practices during this campaign shouldn’t be competitive with an evangelical candidate with dozens of prominent Christian leaders behind him. But Trump was — until last night, when he faded. The early entrance poll in Iowa claimed that Cruz was running was just two points ahead of him among evangelicals, 26/24, which, if true, would have been a disaster for Cruz and almost certainly would have delivered Iowa to Trump. That’s because evangelicals made up 62 percent(!) of the electorate. If Trump could neutralize Cruz’s advantage with them, the remaining 38 percent of voters would probably give him the win.

But, as John McCormack notes at the Standard, the early entrance polls were very different from the final entrance polls:

evn

Cruz 33, Trump 21. Rubio finished tied for second with the same number as Trump. If you win by double digits among a group that exceeds 60 percent of the overall electorate, odds are good that you’re going to win. As for why Trump underperformed here, you can float as many plausible reasons as I can — effective attack ads noting Trump’s prior support for abortion, persuasive endorsements of Cruz by Bob Vander Plaats and other influential Christians, smart targeted turnout measures aimed by Team Cruz at evangelicals, and of course the plain fact that Trump isn’t a devout believer himself. “New York values” may have helped too: A member of Cruz’s team told Bloomberg News that that was no ad lib by Cruz but was designed to appeal to specific voters they had in mind. Everything Cruz and his team did was carefully planned, and nothing more so than their all-important evangelical turnout operation.

The other Trump landmine being considered this morning by the punditocracy was his decision to skip the last debate. My prediction of the outcome yesterday was, er, not so smart, but I’ll mitigate it slightly by noting that I did think Trump’s decision to pass on Fox and Megyn Kelly wasn’t the genius move that most of the rest of the media seemed to think at the time. Emerson College, which got closer to the actual result in Iowa than any other pollster, tucked this bit of data away in their crosstabs yesterday. Hmmm:

skip

That’s a lot of Iowans who say Trump skipping out made them less likely to vote for him. Nate Silver made that connection too last night, before even a quarter of the votes were in:

With 19 percent of Iowa precincts reporting, Donald Trump has 27.1 percent of the Iowa vote. That’s not a bad result by any means: Trump trails Ted Cruz by just 3 points and could very easily win the state. Still, a case can be made that (contra the pundit conventional wisdom at the time) Trump was mistaken to have skipped last week’s debate. Trump stood at 31.1 percent in our Iowa polling average on the night of the debate, so if he finishes at 27.1 percent, he’ll have lost 4 percentage points since then.

It’s hard to attribute a late slide in the polls to any single silver-bullet factor — maybe Rubio’s surge peeled some votes away from Trump, maybe evangelicals who were on the fence tilted heavily towards Cruz — but passing on the debate seemed even at the time like a needless risk for a guy who was ahead of Cruz and had held his own at multiple debates already. Why take a chance that Iowans will feel snubbed, or that they’ll perceive Trump as behaving as though further debates are beneath him? Megyn Kelly asked Krauthammer last night whether he thought missing the debate hurt Trump. He makes a good point at around 2:50 of the clip below: Even if Iowans weren’t insulted by Trump boycotting, Trump not being there gave Cruz and, importantly, Rubio more opportunities to make their case. For once the spotlight was on them, not Trump, and it came at a moment when thousands upon thousands were only beginning to make up their minds. According to the entrance poll, fully 35 percent of caucusgoers decided yesterday or “in the last few days.” Trump may have enabled the Rubio surge by sitting out.

Good news for Trump fans, though. He’ll definitely be at Saturday’s debate, having learned his lesson from this failure, and evangelicals aren’t the force in New Hampshire that they are in Iowa. If he disappoints next Tuesday, it’ll be for different reasons. One more point: Scroll down through the entrance poll data and you’ll find some surprising results when caucusgoers were asked who they favored on important issues. Those who said immigration was most important preferred Trump, of course. Those who said the economy, though, preferred Marco Rubio by nine points over Trump — an unexpected result given that Trump usually wins on the economy in primary polls. Those who said terrorism was most important favored Ted Cruz, another shock given that Trump and Rubio typically are seen as more muscular would-be presidents on foreign policy. If Trump’s losing his lead on individual issues, maybe he’s in more trouble than thought.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

Schad,

Sorry dude, but I’m not kidding. I have no clue about pretty much anything. Yeah, the occasional wisecrack to lighten the mood, but WYSIWYG. Hopefully, my betters will tell me for whom I should vote. Right now, what I hear them saying is Anybody But Trump. Sounds good to me.

Christien on February 2, 2016 at 12:56 PM

Apparently the Sanders people are going nuts over the 6 Hillary coin toss wins and the missing precincts. I think I’m gonna make some popcorn. This should be good.

Paperclips on February 2, 2016 at 12:57 PM

Would have been a more interesting post to discuss the merits of Blue Darts, Allah.

After seeing this title, I’m bored. Gonna go play Fallout 4 on my snow-day off. Blowing up 200-year old nuclear powered automobiles is never boring.

To be a witness to this much stupidity all around in commentary the day after the Iowa Caucus is giving me a headache.

UnstChem on February 2, 2016 at 12:07 PM

Dude! Bag some supermutants for me while I’m stuck at work!

:-)

Agent Cooper on February 2, 2016 at 12:57 PM

And by “we” I mean, people who know what another GOP presidency will do to this country.

libfreeordie on February 2, 2016 at 12:20 PM

Wow, you need some more Pomegranite Tea.

So Obama’s a Republican??

ToddPA on February 2, 2016 at 12:58 PM

Just wondering boxhead
I’m thinking he’ll win in NH but it is a toss up after that imo

cmsinaz on February 2, 2016 at 12:45 PM

If Rubio can keep it close in SC I think you might be right.
But Rubio is not well liked in FL.
IDK.
If Trump easily wins SC then IMO it’s over.
I personally don’t think Cruz can win and he only has TX and a few small sates left for him.

If Trump doesn’t win NH convincingly then I’ll call Rubio the favorite. But Rubio has a past that Romney didn’t like and Trump has yet to go negative on him so …

BoxHead1 on February 2, 2016 at 12:58 PM

Iowa cost per vote

jeb $2674

rubio $255

cruz $116

Trump $66

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/02/02/jeb-bush-biggest-spender-in-iowa-2674-per-vote/

the cost per delegate in Iowa was

Trump 471k

cruz 750k

rubio 1.7 million

jeb 15 million

Garyinaz66 on February 2, 2016 at 12:58 PM

Why did Trump underperform in Iowa?

Premature celebration.

Buttercup on February 2, 2016 at 12:51 PM

I figured it was that Evil dumbazz Palin woman….

Come on PDSers, that’s your signal!

ToddPA on February 2, 2016 at 12:53 PM

No, she did not hurt him any IMHO and I can admit I wish she had backed Cruz but it is what it is.

Buttercup on February 2, 2016 at 1:00 PM

Thank God Ted Cruz beat The Donald. That is all.

Jack_Burton on February 2, 2016 at 1:00 PM

Trump boosted turnout to a new record high. However, the voters came out to stop him.

Trump would be a disaster in the general. He would bring out every Democrat, liberal, socialist, and minority to vote against him.

El_Terrible on February 2, 2016 at 1:07 PM

Trump

For Trump interns reading here:

Get this info to the boss.

Arizona Border Surveillance Technology Plan

80′ towers with radar, sensors, cameras, real time connections to Border Patrol officers on the ground.
7 of 52 now operational, very good
Company from Israel won contract, Rathon protested but the company from Israel still has contract.

Story at:

http://www.azdailysun.com/
by Perla Treviso
Title: Past border technology efforts failed but not this one, experts say,

There is a Texas company with a 200′ tower with better and more tech that located 3 to 4 miles inside the U S can see night and day into up to 20 miles inside Mexico.

Pass this on to the boss.
He needs to stand at the bottom of one of the ones in AZ and ask why are the others not in operation and why the Texas stuff still not even approved.
Gov. Abbott what’s up????

Thanks,

APACHEWHOKNOWS on February 2, 2016 at 1:07 PM

I predicted nearly these exact results last week. When you as Trump did, reached out to less than15% of GOPers, and Cruz reach around 40% , you lose. If Trump had increased his ground game by 10%, he might have won.

Of course, it is ok with me that he lost. I am a free agent, but have already decided who I will not vote for, and top of that list is Trump.

ConservativePartyNow on February 2, 2016 at 1:07 PM

The race has just begun. Good Lord, Iowa is not worth a spit. It has never ever produced a winner. Matter of fact, the winners have always lost. So, Cruz should be in big trouble. You don’t bet against the house.

they lie on February 2, 2016 at 1:10 PM

Now that The Donald is finished, I see Cruz was right all along; it is a two-man race between him and Rubio. Two Cuban-Americans to boot. What are the odds of that? I still can’t understand why neither of them can kick Fidel and Raul’s decrepit behinds. Maybe convenience trumps liberty or death. I don’t know.

Christien on February 2, 2016 at 1:13 PM

I don’t still know why Trump underperformed or if he underperformed. There has to be a simple explanation.

Christien on February 2, 2016 at 12:48 PM

.
There is a very simple explanation:

Don’t be one of those who can’t see the forest for looking at the weeds.

Which in this case, is 99.99% of the MSM & GOPe-media.

The bottom line:

Cruz spent millions of dollars to build a highly effective GOTV operation which netted him 6,439 more votes and 1 more delegate.

Ever watch the movie “Moneyball”?

Cruz is running the New York Yankees of a campaign team in order to achieve a 3 way TIE.

Trump spent 1% of what Cruz did in Iowa – his return on investment is phenomenal.

Rubio effectively got all of the late deciders which suggests Cruz’s last minute attacks on Rubio had a reverse effect and/or the undecideds were the “GOPe vote” who just couldn’t bring themselves to take a chance.

PolAgnostic on February 2, 2016 at 1:13 PM

Iowa cost per vote

jeb $2674

rubio $255

cruz $116

Trump $66

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/02/02/jeb-bush-biggest-spender-in-iowa-2674-per-vote/

the cost per delegate in Iowa was

Trump 471k

cruz 750k

rubio 1.7 million

jeb 15 million

Garyinaz66 on February 2, 2016 at 12:58 PM


Interesting data
… with one BIG flaw. It is ONLY the ad spending data.

It doesn’t tell us how much was spent of GOTV efforts. Add that in for Cruz and his numbers will be a LOT closer to Rubio’s spending numbers.

PolAgnostic on February 2, 2016 at 1:19 PM

PolAgnostic,

Thanks for dumbing it down for me, but I still don’t get it. Never saw Moneyball, but I heard it was really good. Why didn’t Trump supporters just hand out Benjamins and fat sacks of “corn” or dope and buy more votes? Everyone has a price, especially in this economy.

Christien on February 2, 2016 at 1:21 PM

Everything Cruz and his team did was carefully planned …

Sounds like a far cry from the current administration.

Seems like Cruz and whatever team he puts together would be a “yuge” improvement over the last 8 years.

Oxymoron on February 2, 2016 at 1:22 PM

Trump spent 1% of what Cruz did in Iowa – his return on investment is phenomenal.

That’s because Trump is getting millions in free publicity every single night on the media. I’m not criticizing him for it or saying it’s a bad thing but you can’t disregard it as a factor.

tommyboy on February 2, 2016 at 1:26 PM

Trump spent 1% of what Cruz did in Iowa – his return on investment is phenomenal.

Umm… this was/is a political campaign, not an investment strategy. A return on investment that nets you second place is not phenomenal, it is a big miscalculation.

Neitherleftorright on February 2, 2016 at 1:32 PM

I predicted nearly these exact results last week. When you as Trump did, reached out to less than 15% of GOPers, and Cruz reach around 40% , you lose. If Trump had increased his ground game by 10%, he might have won.

If Trump can get a reasonably close second place and record turnout with less than half of the outreach effort that Cruz put in, it seems to me that he is in pretty good shape, especially when you consider that Iowa is not winner take all. They are currently 1 delegate apart.

Remember, Trump is beating Cruz like a drum in NH – the poll margins there are much higher there than they ever were for Trump in Iowa. Cruz hasn’t topped a single poll – it’s all Trump. Going into NH it is Cruz who is going to need a near-perfect ground game to make up the difference. Trump has to boost his only marginally, if at all.

Take a look at the NH polling:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/nh/new_hampshire_republican_presidential_primary-3350.html#polls

and for comparison, the IA polling, which is notoriously less reliable for GOP candidates:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/ia/iowa_republican_presidential_caucus-3194.html#polls

You see that Cruz was ahead in several polls in IA. He is ahead in zero polls in NH.

Missy on February 2, 2016 at 1:41 PM

A return on investment that nets you second place is not phenomenal, it is a big miscalculation.

Neitherleftorright on February 2, 2016 at 1:32 PM

If you’re talking second place overall, sure. But the primary is a series of elections, of which Iowa is the first, and at least as far as the GOP is concerned, the least predictive. Cruz currently has 8 delegates, Trump has 7.

A close second place with minimal time, effort & spending suggests a strong level of support that doesn’t need a whole lot of GOTV investment. That’s a nice place to be. Just ask Mitt Romney.

Missy on February 2, 2016 at 1:45 PM

Would have been a more interesting post to discuss the merits of Blue Darts, Allah.

After seeing this title, I’m bored. Gonna go play Fallout 4 on my snow-day off. Blowing up 200-year old nuclear powered automobiles is never boring.

To be a witness to this much stupidity all around in commentary the day after the Iowa Caucus is giving me a headache.

UnstChem on February 2, 2016 at 12:07 PM

Dude! Bag some supermutants for me while I’m stuck at work!

:-)

Agent Cooper on February 2, 2016 at 12:57 PM

More Dog Meat, less Piper.

Immolate on February 2, 2016 at 1:49 PM

Missy on February 2, 2016 at 1:45 PM

Sure, except that was not Trump’s intended result. The ego is bruised and he operates on pure ego.

Neitherleftorright on February 2, 2016 at 1:54 PM

I detested Dog Eater and Killary doing it, I’ll feel the same if Cruz follows suit.

Bishop on February 2, 2016 at 12:34 PM

I hear what you are saying, except for them it was pure pandering, as that is not their background or oft expressed profession of faith, in any way. Cruz may keep it less overt in the agnostic states,

Neitherleftorright on February 2, 2016 at 12:43 PM

I would expect Cruz for the most part to tone down the proselytizing going forward but he’ll never escape his ties to Dominionism – an ideology that calls on “anointed Christian” leaders to take over the state and make the goals and laws of the nation “biblical.” His father will be portrayed as part of this “cult” and as a rabid right-wing Christian preacher who believes the country should be theologically driven and that opposes women’s equality, would take control of their bodies, make them subservient to their spouses, refuse them birth control and take away their right to vote. .
I haven’t seen much of anything on conservative blogs on this particular “detail” about Cruz, but libs talk about it all the time and have been for years. Just saying the word “Dominionist” is like hearing nails on a chalkboard for them….drives them batsh!t crazy. If Cruz were to win the nomination, I’m fairly certain the left will push this narrative for all it’s worth.

lynncgb on February 2, 2016 at 1:57 PM

I would expect Cruz for the most part to tone down the proselytizing going forward but he’ll never escape his ties to Dominionism – an ideology that calls on “anointed Christian” leaders to take over the state and make the goals and laws of the nation “biblical.” His father will be portrayed as part of this “cult” and as a rabid right-wing Christian preacher who believes the country should be theologically driven and that opposes women’s equality, would take control of their bodies, make them subservient to their spouses, refuse them birth control and take away their right to vote. .
I haven’t seen much of anything on conservative blogs on this particular “detail” about Cruz, but libs talk about it all the time and have been for years. Just saying the word “Dominionist” is like hearing nails on a chalkboard for them….drives them batsh!t crazy. If Cruz were to win the nomination, I’m fairly certain the left will push this narrative for all it’s worth.

lynncgb on February 2, 2016 at 1:57 PM

So Cruz is a problem because his enemies will oppose him. Got it.

Immolate on February 2, 2016 at 2:00 PM

Sure, except that was not Trump’s intended result. The ego is bruised and he operates on pure ego.

Neitherleftorright on February 2, 2016 at 1:54 PM

Maybe he does, maybe he doesn’t. Who knows? People predicted a meltdown, but he didn’t sound too bruised last night. Speech was short and gracious.

Missy on February 2, 2016 at 2:07 PM

right-wing Christian preacher who believes the country should be theologically driven and that opposes women’s equality, would take control of their bodies, make them subservient to their spouses, refuse them birth control and take away their right to vote. .

lynncgb on February 2, 2016 at 1:57 PM

Please provide proof of him saying the he opposes women’s equality and he wants to take control of their bodies and refuse birth control and remove a woman’s right to vote.

Otherwise you are blathering leftist drivel. Which they use on anyone with and R behind their name during election season.

Neitherleftorright on February 2, 2016 at 2:09 PM

Missy on February 2, 2016 at 2:07 PM

Of course he does.. it is who he is and why he is where he is. You don’t become a billionaire real estate tycoon by acting like Ben Carson.

Neitherleftorright on February 2, 2016 at 2:12 PM

A close second place with minimal time, effort & spending suggests a strong level of support that doesn’t need a whole lot of GOTV investment. That’s a nice place to be. Just ask Mitt Romney.

Missy on February 2, 2016 at 1:45 PM

And if that’s all it was, it would be happy hour in the Trump campaign. But while Trump cheaped out on Iowa, he invested lots of himself there, allying himself with people like Palin and Falwell and the Governor to try to secure the win. He started a nasty and mean-spirited fight with Cruz, which had to turn a lot of folks off even as it attracted the lookie-loos.

So may have improved his relative numbers against Cruz in Iowa, but he lost a fight of choice and in doing so, opened the door wide open for Rubio to start consolidating support and become the champion the establishment is looking for.

Trump could not control his pride and cost himself an alliance, the potential support of a substantial group of people, and he lost a fist fight that he started while everyone watched. Rationalize though you will, it was a really bad day for Trump. He probably still wins, but possibilities exist today that didn’t exist yesterday.

Immolate on February 2, 2016 at 2:13 PM

Immolate on February 2, 2016 at 2:13 PM

We’ll see. Cruz gave as good as he got in the nasty department. I agree that Rubio benefits from a Trump-Cruz fistfight, but I don’t see how a Trump-Cruz fistfight is avoidable.

All I know is that far, “Trump has really destroyed his chances this time!” predictors do not have a very good batting average.

Missy on February 2, 2016 at 2:22 PM

John Nolte: Over the last few election cycles, the DC Media have used polling as a means to control the national political conversation, and, by extension, the ultimate outcome. If the polls are seen as unreliable, so too will any narrative or message built on them.

d1carter on February 2, 2016 at 2:28 PM

Of course he does.. it is who he is and why he is where he is. You don’t become a billionaire real estate tycoon by acting like Ben Carson.

Neitherleftorright on February 2, 2016 at 2:12 PM

Maybe he is ego-driven on some level, but I don’t think he is *operating* on ego, or he would have spent far more money in IA to ensure the yugest possible result. Instead he got a quite decent result with minimal money spent. That says to me he is making decisions based on something besides ego. But YMMV. I’m no good at mind-reading, I’m watching what he does.

Missy on February 2, 2016 at 2:29 PM

Isn’t it obvious? Iowans started reading the comments on this site of Trump supporters. Especially by the people who will comment adversely on this comment.

Basilsbest on February 2, 2016 at 2:31 PM

Would have been a more interesting post to discuss the merits of Blue Darts, Allah.

After seeing this title, I’m bored. Gonna go play Fallout 4 on my snow-day off. Blowing up 200-year old nuclear powered automobiles is never boring.

To be a witness to this much stupidity all around in commentary the day after the Iowa Caucus is giving me a headache.

UnstChem on February 2, 2016 at 12:07 PM

Dude! Bag some supermutants for me while I’m stuck at work!

:-)

Agent Cooper on February 2, 2016 at 12:57 PM

More Dog Meat, less Piper.

Immolate on February 2, 2016 at 1:49 PM

Ad Victoriam!

Alberta_Patriot on February 2, 2016 at 2:32 PM

So Cruz is a problem because his enemies will oppose him. Got it.

Immolate on February 2, 2016 at 2:00 PM

No, you don’t get it. I was stating how I believe Cruz will be opposed, not that he will be opposed.
But I do see it as an enormous weakness in spite of his other strengths.

lynncgb on February 2, 2016 at 2:32 PM

Missy on February 2, 2016 at 2:29 PM

To me his decisions are clearly based on his ego. His decision not to spend more in IA was because he believed he was getting all the press and mentions he needed. His ego lead him to think that the polls were all correct. His actions showed that he believed the crowds at his rallies were there to blindly follow him. His passing the last debate showed that his ego was easily bruised and his ego allowed him to believe he was miles ahead. The shrewd, calculating business person side of him was, well, you give me an example of it, because I can’t see it in his IA performance.

Neitherleftorright on February 2, 2016 at 2:42 PM

Please provide proof of him saying the he opposes women’s equality and he wants to take control of their bodies and refuse birth control and remove a woman’s right to vote.

Otherwise you are blathering leftist drivel. Which they use on anyone with and R behind their name during election season.

Neitherleftorright on February 2, 2016 at 2:09 PM

Since when do Democrats need proof of their accusations? Did voters ask for proof of Romney saying he would ban tampons? No, but don’t think for a minute hordes of them didn’t go into lady parts panic when liberals made the claim. In Cruz’s case, there will be actual evidence of
“the political partnership between Senator Ted Cruz of Texas and his father”.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/356934/rise-rafael-cruz-robert-costa

lynncgb on February 2, 2016 at 2:42 PM

Neitherleftorright on February 2, 2016 at 2:42 PM

I don’t really see it, but I’ll give it some consideration. We’ll know more by how he reacts in the next few weeks.

Missy on February 2, 2016 at 2:45 PM

Congratulations to president-elect Ted Cruz. Kind of puzzled that the Trump fans are still acting like it isn’t over.

Christien on February 2, 2016 at 12:08 PM

Obviously, you don’t know much about politics.

cimbri on February 2, 2016 at 2:50 PM

Trump could not control his pride and cost himself an alliance, the potential support of a substantial group of people, and he lost a fist fight that he started while everyone watched. Rationalize though you will, it was a really bad day for Trump. He probably still wins, but possibilities exist today that didn’t exist yesterday.

Immolate on February 2, 2016 at 2:13 PM

Baloney, he got the voters he should have gotten. That whole Cruz alliance thing is silly, from start to finish. There can be only one nominee, and Cruz will swing his delegates to the establishment candidate when the time comes anyway. Trump has to win big to win this nomination.

cimbri on February 2, 2016 at 2:55 PM

lynncgb on February 2, 2016 at 2:42 PM

Was this not your opinion too? I have no doubt the left will stir up some sort of nonsense. So what? What do you think they have up their sleeve for Trump?

It is illogical to argue for or against a Republican candidate based on what the Dems, may or may not do. They will do everything they can like they always do, regardless of who the candidate is. The real issue is, who can fire back, build a ground game and withstand the salvos.

Neitherleftorright on February 2, 2016 at 2:57 PM

So Cruz is a problem because his enemies will oppose him. Got it.

Immolate on February 2, 2016 at 2:00 PM

Messianic Ted is blasphemer, a religious nut like Glenn Beck. The more his religious delusions get exposed, the worse it will be for him.

Anti-ControI on February 2, 2016 at 3:13 PM

Why did Trump underperform in Iowa?

Because Iowa wasn’t worth the dedication of resources for him. The other guys had to expend enormous resources there.

cajunpatriot on February 2, 2016 at 3:45 PM

Was this not your opinion too? I have no doubt the left will stir up some sort of nonsense. So what? What do you think they have up their sleeve for Trump?

Do I think President Cruz would ban birth control or want to take away a woman’s right to vote? Of course not. But his ties to a more controversial ideology are true nonetheless. When we have Rafael Cruz declaring son Ted to be ‘The Anointed One’ and casting a halo on him, I think we’ve got a big problem right from the start. Hillary fires one shot and Cruz is already looking a little creepy.

It is illogical to argue for or against a Republican candidate based on what the Dems, may or may not do.

They will do everything they can like they always do, regardless of who the candidate is. The real issue is, who can fire back, build a ground game and withstand the salvos.

Neitherleftorright on February 2, 2016 at 2:57 PM

All the pros and cons that we are aware of beforehand have to be taken into account and it makes no sense to say we’ll worry about Cruz’s religious background and possible narrow appeal later. Not to take all risks into consideration is self-defeating.

lynncgb on February 2, 2016 at 4:07 PM

Is anybody interested in the real reason. Maybe a sitting US Congressman tweeting right into the caucus site that Carson was out and to tell the Carson folks taht and get their vote would have pumped up the Evangelicals Cruz got by stealing them from Carson?…
http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/political-establishment-cheated-stole-iowa-caucus-from-donald-trump-bombshell/

ConcealedKerry on February 2, 2016 at 4:10 PM

Congratulations to president-elect Ted Cruz. Kind of puzzled that the Trump fans are still acting like it isn’t over.

Christien on February 2, 2016 at 12:08 PM

Obviously, you don’t know much about politics.

cimbri on February 2, 2016 at 2:50 PM

He has something you lack. Think about it.

Basilsbest on February 2, 2016 at 5:04 PM

Christien on February 2, 2016 at 12:56 PM

And some of the following :)

Schadenfreude on February 2, 2016 at 5:06 PM

lynncgb on February 2, 2016 at 4:07 PM

Fair enough.
Cruz has a religious father who loves his son too much. Bad
Cruz has an exceptional ground game and data processing/analysis system. Good.
Trump has excellent name recognition and rabid followers. Good
Trump has virtually no ground organization, no paid for and strategically placed media presence and so far little in the way of data processing/analysis systems. Bad.

So far they’re neck and neck.

Neitherleftorright on February 2, 2016 at 6:00 PM

Cruz has a religious father who loves his son too much. is a polarizing figure which will no doubt rub off on Cruz. -Bad
Cruz has an exceptional ground game and data processing/analysis system. way of pigeon-holing himself by using religion as an electoral strategy. Good. -Bad
Trump has excellent name recognition and rabid followers who are trying to prevent the masters of the universe from getting their amnesty and transformative global pact on trade . -Good
Trump has virtually no ground organization, no paid for and strategically placed media presence and so far little in the way of data processing/analysis systems. the only chance of a winning roadmap against Rubio by doing what works 100% of the time and broadening the base, not narrowing it. Bad. -Good

So far they’re neck and neck.
Neitherleftorright on February 2, 2016 at 6:00 PM

Not so much. :-)

lynncgb on February 2, 2016 at 6:35 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3